I highly doubt that any recount, or any correction of vote fraud or vote anomalies could change the outcome of this presidential election. Nevertheless, the vote counting and related controversy continues - especially in Ohio.

While Kerry may have made his non-legally-binding concession, the Ohio Democratic Party has initiated a federal court suit regarding the 155,000 provisional ballots in that state. Claiming the provisional ballots could change the outcome of the election, the lawsuit asks for uniform standards for counting the ballots in all 88 counties in Ohio.

At the moment, it appears that roughly 81% of the ballots will be counted, making for a total of 124,000 additional votes - even if these were 100% for Kerry (and there's no reason to think that) the outcome of the election would still be the same.

At the same time, the Green and Libertarian party candidates, Cobb and Badnarik, have teamed up to demand a state wide recount in Ohio. They formed an alliance to raise the needed funds for the $113,600 bond to pay the state of Ohio for the recount, and additional funds to handle the logistics of supervising the recount. So far they've raised over $221,000, and are delivering the formal demand for the recount today.

Could a recount change the outcome? it is statistically unlikely - but a hand recount may take into account the 92,672 "spoiled" ballots that didn't register a vote for president when counted by machine. Nevertheless, it's only wishful thinking on the part of Democrats that these uncounted ballots, and the yet to be counted provisional ballots, will break 80 to 85% for Kerry - the amount needed for him to win. Absurdly unlikely.

It's also wishful thinking to believe that the recount can be done in time. Any recount won't start until the election results are certified on December 6th and that recount must be complete before the electors convene on the 13th. Considering the debacle in Florida in 2000, we might want to brace ourselves for the flying circus about to unfold in Ohio.

Of course, a valid argument for the recount is not so much to change the outcome, but to show that our election process is fair and free of fraud. As the "leaders of the free world", we have a duty to set the example; to have an election process that sets the world standard. But with electronic machines that leave no paper trail, and voters registering in multiple states and voting more than once - I think we have a ways to go in perfecting our election process. Perhaps the interest in this year's election will focus enough attention on the problem to get the needed changes made.

For more on the Democratic lawsuit, <a href="http://www.cleveland.com/news/plaindealer/index.ssf?/base/news/110077402787260.xml"> see this story</a> and for more on the Green/Libertarian recount, <a href="http://www.votecobb.org/"> see this web page.</a>

Of course, a valid argument for the recount is not so much to change the outcome, but to show that our election process is fair and free of fraud.

Click to expand...

Bullshit! You just said....

At the moment, it appears that roughly 81% of the ballots will be counted, making for a total of 124,000 additional votes - even if these were 100% for Kerry (and there's no reason to think that) the outcome of the election would still be the same.

Click to expand...

So why do it? I'll tell ya...cuz..

It's also wishful thinking to believe that the recount can be done in time. Any recount won't start until the election results are certified on December 6th and that recount must be complete before the electors convene on the 13th. Considering the debacle in Florida in 2000, we might want to brace ourselves for the flying circus about to unfold in Ohio.

Anyone else seem to think its odd that this so called libertarian seems to want to believe Kerry won the election when if he is a libertarian as he claims a kerry presidency would strive for the exact opposite of everything he claims to believe in?

I have a question for you, why is it in 2000 when Gore won the popular vote dems complained that Bush stole the election, now in 2004 when bush won the popular vote by 3+ million do dems still complain he stole the election?

Even Kerry has let this go. Further as the posters above pointed out, if it is so unlikely then why bother making it an issue? I understand it may be news, as such it is of interest, however, the interest wanes, in that, it is really just complainers who lost an election and are using their news sources as outlets.

Anyone else seem to think its odd that this so called libertarian seems to want to believe Kerry won the election when if he is a libertarian as he claims a kerry presidency would strive for the exact opposite of everything he claims to believe in?

Anyone else seem to think its odd that this so called libertarian seems to want to believe Kerry won the election when if he is a libertarian as he claims a kerry presidency would strive for the exact opposite of everything he claims to believe in?

Click to expand...

Where on earth did I say I want to believe Kerry won the election? I clearly state that there's no way that's the case. You guys love putting words in other people's mouths, don't you?

As far as Bush vs Kerry - on most civil liberties issues, Kerry's a better choice - Bush is a civil libertarian's nightmare (partly due to his appointment of Ashcroft - we'll have to see about Gonzolas). Bush, being Republican, *should* be for smaller government - a core Libertarian value - but Bush is not for smaller government - he's for deficit spending and huge national debts.

Kerry was not ideal in terms of civil liberties (he wrote the money laundering portions of the Patriot Act), but he was better on many civil liberties issues than Bush.

Of course, Kerry is WAY out to lunch on issues like "health care for all" and similar social programs - with a nation with a debt load like ours, social programs are the last thing we should be developing. Governmental restraint is what is needed now.

In other words, I'm not happy with either candidate. Both are part of the political establishment, and both are unremarkable individuals, as I mentioned in another thread.

Even Kerry has let this go. Further as the posters above pointed out, if it is so unlikely then why bother making it an issue? I understand it may be news, as such it is of interest, however, the interest wanes, in that, it is really just complainers who lost an election and are using their news sources as outlets.

Click to expand...

Even though the outcome will not change, it's still useful to understand the dynamics and potential abuses or failings of our election system.

Useful Searches

About USMessageBoard.com

USMessageBoard.com was founded in 2003 with the intent of allowing all voices to be heard. With a wildly diverse community from all sides of the political spectrum, USMessageBoard.com continues to build on that tradition. We welcome everyone despite political and/or religious beliefs, and we continue to encourage the right to free speech.

Come on in and join the discussion. Thank you for stopping by USMessageBoard.com!